The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1887-11-26

ennanded that delegates to the state ,
should be chosen by par
sh convention. But their opposition
vas disregarded aud Mr.. Smiths reso-
utiou calling the mass-meetfng for
November 26th was adopted. No fur
her action was taken by the executive
We deem it proper to call attention
% the fact that portion of the petition
If 473 white Democrats has, by this
action of the committee, been disre-
zarded and denied without discussion,
under a pretense Of taking the matter
into fuller consideration. We also
ieem It proper to call attention to the
statement of the gentleman who Intro
duced the resolution, that this action |
was taken In the Interest of g. d. NC |
Every, a candidate for Governor, this
gentleman holding that It was highly
that the Ouachlta delegates
should be elected without delay, In or
der to promote Mr.. McEaery's candi-
dacy. This was a distinct setting OF
the Interests of one man above the In
terests OF the party, and In our opinion
was undemocratic.
This mass.meeting was called con-
trary to the expressed wishes of large
and respectable part of the Democracy
of the parish. It is weii-known that It
is practically impossible for large
number of the Democrats of this parish
to attend parish mass-meetiog, and
this inability was one of leading rea-
sons why they petitioned for primary
ELECTIONS. The shortuess Of the time
between the publication Of the call and
the day for holding the mass meeting
renders 1t certain that large number
of Democrats In the parish will never
know that the mass-meetipg was called
until after it had been held. These
facts convince US that 1t was not the
desire of those who voted for the reso'
luton to have any large part OF the
white Democratic voters present at the
meeting.
Since the meeting of the executive
Icommittee we have examined the pro
Iceedings of the convention OF 1884, ant
have become convinced that the chair
man of the executive committee ha
made eight appointments to fill vacan
cies on the committee which he ha
no authority to make. We are satisfies
that the committee as constituted o.
10Th November was body which ha
no right 10 speak for the Democrat
, party of the parish since 1t lacked
legal quorum of members, and sine
five out of the nine wards OF the paris
were without legal representation Their
: on. We regard the constitution of tn
:: committee as originally contemplate
q by the convention as departure fro'
2 Democratic precedent in this parisl
: and the assumption that one wal
d should have more power In the con
mittee than another as a gross injusti'
2 to the smaller wards.
= But even the injustice original
c contemplated has been exceeded t
the chairman OF the committee In me-
- Letting to order elections to fill the "
j. caucies from Wards 2, 8, s, 6, and
and farther by a minority In numoe
3 of the committee assuming to act I
- the Democratic party of the parf
Ia when five out of the nine wards we
ic unrepresented on the committee.
After due consideration of the m'
= ter, we feel 1t our duty to apprise I
Democrats of Ouachita that the acti
q. of minority, less than a quorum
the executive committee, In calling
e mass meeting for Saturday, Noveml
,e 26tb, against the expressed wish
We nearly 500 white Democratic voters,
illegal, arbitrary, null and void and
It, no way binding upon the Democra
K. party. We also feel it our duty to 81
~ that If this minority of the execute
ee committee, headed by the chairm'
be persists In the purpose TO act, In
To- revolutionary manner, that 1t will c
at play a determination on their part
K exceed their delegated powers, and
at disregard the will of the Democrs
of party Of the parish, and that In
to event it becomes the right ADD
duty of Democrats 10 depose them IF
oil authority and reorganize the party